Dolls Head/Rib Extension Fit?

[Skybuster]

Does the fit of the Dolls Head matter much for Parkers? Pictures below show a wide variation in the fit/contact with the frame recess. Did they come from the factory like this? Or is it use, abuse, or gunplumbers? Is it something you look at when making a purchase? The last picture seems correct. While the second picture is an AAHE.

Screenshot_20250204_193530_DuckDuckGo.jpg

Screenshot_20250202_190235_DuckDuckGo.jpg

Screenshot_20250204_193432_DuckDuckGo.jpg

Screenshot_20250204_193308_DuckDuckGo.jpg

[Reggie B]

The last picture is how I like them to fit on Parkers I own. When "worn" guns are re-finished and "tightened up" it often creates improper fitment of the dolls head.

[edgarspencer]

The first picture is so magnified, if it is the original fit, it's made to appear worse, but it could easily be as it was when it left the factory. The last one is how an original gun should look, regardless how many shots have gone downrange. The middle two pictures, again over magnified, appear as though they may be replacement barrels.

[Stan Hillis]

Keep in mind, too, that the "fit" you're seeing is only at the top. You cannot see how much better it may be fitting at the bottom. Only smoking will really tell the tale.

[Dean Romig]

I agree with Edgar with the exception of the middle two, to me, indicate the barrels have been tightened to the frame.
My 1898 DH came back from Russ Bickel looking somewhat like the middle two, though not quite as wide a gap, after he tightened my Titanic barrels. When I sent the gun go him it looked more like #4.





.

[Bill Murphy]

What kind of "tightening" or gunsmithing would change the fit of the doll's head? In my opinion, only indiscriminate filing would cause these gaps. Are you sure Russ sent the gun back with the same barrels you sent to him?

[Dean Romig]

Originally Posted by Bill Murphy

What kind of "tightening" or gunsmithing would change the fit of the doll's head? In my opinion, only indiscriminate filing would cause these gaps. Are you sure Russ sent the gun back with the same barrels you sent to him?

Gimme a break Bill… Of course he sent the original barrels back refitted with absolutely NO more slight wiggle.

I would never question Russ’ ethics in gunsmithing.





.

[edgarspencer]

So, just to clarify, you don't really agree with me.
Putting a gun back on face involves correcting the fit of the hook and joint roll, which would not explain the gap between the frame recess and dolls head.
The fitting of the rib extension to the receiver, such as shown in the last photo, is done before it is soldered to the barrel. A barrel going off face is a change in the gap between the hook and joint roll, not the fit of the rib extension.

[Dean Romig]

Originally Posted by edgarspencer

So, just to clarify, you don't really agree with me.
Putting a gun back on face involves correcting the fit of the hook and joint roll, which would not explain the gap between the frame recess and dolls head.
The fitting of the rib extension to the receiver, such as shown in the last photo, is done before it is soldered to the barrel. A barrel going off face is a change in the gap between the hook and joint roll, not the fit of the rib extension.

That’s right Edgar and when machining the hook, no matter how little, you’re drawing the barrels back into the frame a bit tighter than they were. Then the rearmost surface of the doll’s head comes into contact with the frame and it must be filed to fit… and the amount of metal that is filed off is equal to the width of the gap that remains at the shoulders of the doll’s head. It’s simple physics… “equal and opposite”.





.

[edgarspencer]

Originally Posted by Dean Romig

That’s right Edgar and when machining the hook, no matter how little, you’re drawing the barrels back into the frame a bit tighter than they were. NO, you're not. Machining metal off the hook allows the barrel to go FORWARD. Then the rearmost surface of the doll’s head comes into contact with the frame and it must be filed to fit…The Barrels won't go any further back because they are up against the breech face. and the amount of metal that is filed off is equal to the width of the gap that remains at the shoulders of the doll’s head. It’s simple physics… “equal and opposite”.

It boggles my mind how you can think this.

When a gun goes off face, it is NOT because material has worn at the back end of the barrels. It is because the hinge pin and hook clearance has increased with repeated wear and, to a lessor degree, the opening and closing of the gun. This gap increase allows the barrels to move forward, away from the breech face. Correcting that wear, by either adding material to the hook, or installing an oversized joint roll, simply puts the barrels back against the breech face, Precisely where they were when the gun was built.
There is never any need to 'file' the back of the dolls head. It's simply being put back to where it was when the gun was built. Not to mention, you can't file the back of the dolls head, on an ejector gun, because of the stop plate and screw. Another thing you're forgetting, is the rear lug of the barrels. The back surface of the rear lug is within .001" of the frame, below the bolt.